This paper reviews and evaluates various measures of User Information Satisfaction (UIS), a critical yet under-studied aspect of information systems (IS) effectiveness. UIS is defined as the extent to which users believe the information system meets their information needs. The authors critically analyze four existing measures: Gallagher's questionnaire, Jenkins and Ricketts' 20-item measure, Larcker and Lessig's "perceived usefulness" scales, and Pearson's 39-item measure. Each measure is critiqued for its empirical derivation, coverage of system product and services, and psychometric properties. The authors select Pearson's measure for further investigation due to its empirical derivation, adequate empirical support, and comprehensive coverage. They conduct a replication study with 800 production managers, focusing on reliability, content validity, predictive validity, and construct validity. The results show that Pearson's measure has acceptable reliability, content validity, and predictive validity. A factor analysis supports its construct validity. To improve the instrument, the authors eliminate scales with poor psychometric qualities and reduce the number of items per scale without compromising reliability. They also develop a "short form" of the instrument for situations where time is limited or only an overall assessment is needed. The short form retains high correlations with the original measure, validating its effectiveness. The authors conclude that the improved Pearson measure represents significant progress toward a standard UIS measurement technique. They encourage further validation, extension, and dissemination of the instrument to both researchers and practitioners in the MIS community. They also advocate for the development of a centralized data bank to facilitate cross-organizational comparisons and enhance the instrument's utility.This paper reviews and evaluates various measures of User Information Satisfaction (UIS), a critical yet under-studied aspect of information systems (IS) effectiveness. UIS is defined as the extent to which users believe the information system meets their information needs. The authors critically analyze four existing measures: Gallagher's questionnaire, Jenkins and Ricketts' 20-item measure, Larcker and Lessig's "perceived usefulness" scales, and Pearson's 39-item measure. Each measure is critiqued for its empirical derivation, coverage of system product and services, and psychometric properties. The authors select Pearson's measure for further investigation due to its empirical derivation, adequate empirical support, and comprehensive coverage. They conduct a replication study with 800 production managers, focusing on reliability, content validity, predictive validity, and construct validity. The results show that Pearson's measure has acceptable reliability, content validity, and predictive validity. A factor analysis supports its construct validity. To improve the instrument, the authors eliminate scales with poor psychometric qualities and reduce the number of items per scale without compromising reliability. They also develop a "short form" of the instrument for situations where time is limited or only an overall assessment is needed. The short form retains high correlations with the original measure, validating its effectiveness. The authors conclude that the improved Pearson measure represents significant progress toward a standard UIS measurement technique. They encourage further validation, extension, and dissemination of the instrument to both researchers and practitioners in the MIS community. They also advocate for the development of a centralized data bank to facilitate cross-organizational comparisons and enhance the instrument's utility.